Barr is Schooling Dem Senators on the Law

[idhawkman]

What a circus on tv right now with AG Barr schooling Feinstein on what a crime is and isn't.

[Aseahawkfan]

American politics at the moment is a circus. Both sides are abusing power like I've never seen, bypassing the checks and balances and generally making American politics a clown show. I have finally reached a point of utter contempt for the government. They are scum looking to legislate, litigate, and argue this country into this sad situation. They all make me sick. Even the Washington State government is using the courts and backdoor legislation to push their way on the citizens. They are no longer representing citizens or protecting freedoms, they are abusing their legislative powers to create laws criminalizing previously legal activities to push their agenda through. Not sure how you escape it other than to move to states where they still have freedom. Washington State is becoming an increasingly socialist, controlling tyrant state.

[burrrton]

I have finally reached a point of utter contempt for the government.

Our government is fine- it's so many politicians that deserve your scorn.

[Aseahawkfan]

Our government is fine- it's so many politicians that deserve your scorn.

The politicians are making themselves the government. Look at the crap they're pushing absent the necessary votes. Washington State pushed through the abolition of the death penalty without a vote of the people. They pushed through increases in school levies on property taxes. They boosted the tabs after we voted 30 dollar tabs. They pushed through a sugar tax, a plastic straw tax, and other such things.

The Democrats are launching investigation after investigation after investigation with no one seemingly able to stop them after already having a two year investigation, an investigation in New York, and other uses of the court to abuse power and play legal games.

This is your idea of the government working fine? I guess we'll agree to disagree. This is not fine to me. This is bureaucratic tyranny. Use the system to create situations where you investigate someone enough to find a crime, then overturn a legal election, weaken the party elected president, and then install your candidate next election. Not to mention spends tons of taxpayer dollars on endless investigations.

Sorry, things are not working well. The consequences of this stupidity may not fall directly on us, but it's going to fall on some generation for the idiocy of these people and the government systems seeming lack of ability to halt this garbage behavior.

[burrrton]

This is your idea of the government working fine?

Yes. You're describing the behavior of politicians, not a critique of our system of government.

There's an easy solution to the over-reach(es) you describe.

[Aseahawkfan]

Yes. You're describing the behavior of politicians, not a critique of our system of government.

There's an easy solution to the over-reach(es) you describe.

What is that solution? Vote them out? Then the next group does similar things. The list of corruption and abuse is nearly endless. The endless scumbaggery is tiresome. I voted for $30 tabs. i never voted to end the death penalty. Yet it gets done. I did vote against the scumbag Dems in Washington State. I don't recall anyone in the State even given a chance to vote for this legislation. They just did it. More and more you see these abuses of legislative power.

Hard to believe you think this trash is ok.

[RiverDog]

Yes. You're describing the behavior of politicians, not a critique of our system of government.

There's an easy solution to the over-reach(es) you describe.

What is that solution? Vote them out? Then the next group does similar things. The list of corruption and abuse is nearly endless. The endless scumbaggery is tiresome. I voted for $30 tabs. i never voted to end the death penalty. Yet it gets done. I did vote against the scumbag Dems in Washington State. I don't recall anyone in the State even given a chance to vote for this legislation. They just did it. More and more you see these abuses of legislative power.

Hard to believe you think this trash is ok.

I'm with burrton on this one. Yes, I voted for $30 license tabs, and no one voted to end the death penalty. We do not live in a pure democracy where the majority always gets their way. Heck, even the 2016 election resulted in the majority opinion not winning the day. It is completely unreasonable to think that we be able to vote on all the issues that came before the Legislature, and I don't want them consulting a poll or focus group, I want them to lead, which sometimes means taking unpopular stands. I'm perfectly happy with being allowed to vote on things that are truly important, like allowing a state income tax.

I have a female friend, former co-worker from China that was outraged that Susan Collins, a Senator elected from Maine with a population a shade over 1 million, could make a decision in a country with a population of 320 million plus that put Bret Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS for life. We had a lively discussion on the formation of the country and the big state/small state compromise that resulted in the make-up of Congress.

We do not live in a pure democracy. We live in a representative republic. We elect representatives to do our bidding for us. I have no desire to live in a country where every single issue is put to a public vote, nor do I desire to live in a place where it's mob rule.

[idhawkman]

Wow, the house oversight meeting today was short and swift but worth 2 buckets of popcorn today. I'm glad that Barr didn't show up for that as we know it was just going to be a trash-fest of the AG.

[burrrton]

I have no desire to live in a country where every single issue is put to a public vote, nor do I desire to live in a place where it's mob rule.

Hear hear.

[burrrton]

I'm glad that Barr didn't show up for that as we know it was just going to be a trash-fest of the AG.

Yeah, after the political stunt that was yesterday's "hearing", I think him opting out today was a foregone conclusion.

[edit]

And the juvenile crap going on today (eating chicken and calling Barr "chicken"? really?) only reinforces that it was the right decision.

[RiverDog]

I'm not sure why they're messing around with Barr anyway. They need to get Mueller up there to testify under oath. That's the only way to get accurate information about the report w/o disclosing it in its entirety.

[burrrton]

That's the only way to get accurate information about the report w/o disclosing it in its entirety.

The full report, minus the few redactions of stuff *nobody*, including Congress, ever gets to see (Grand Jury stuff), is available to 6 House Dems. They refuse to read it.

[RiverDog]

That's the only way to get accurate information about the report w/o disclosing it in its entirety.

The full report, minus the few redactions of stuff *nobody*, including Congress, ever gets to see (Grand Jury stuff), is available to 6 House Dems. They refuse to read it.

7.25% of the report is redacted. That's over one word in 20, more than "a few". Additionally, most of the redactions in the report were on Russian hacking and election interference, the entire reason for commissioning the investigation in the first place.

Here's a graphic that shows the redactions. There are entire pages that are blacked out:

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/19/18485535/ ... data-chart

I'm not sure why anyone would object to Mueller testifying before Congress unless they're afraid of what he might say.

[burrrton]

Additionally, most of the redactions in the report were on Russian hacking and election interference, the entire reason for commissioning the investigation in the first place.

I don't give two squirts if he testifies or not, but where did you read this (honest Q- I haven't done a lot of digging).

I'm not sure what the point is, though- he's not going to discuss anything in those redactions.

[RiverDog]

Additionally, most of the redactions in the report were on Russian hacking and election interference, the entire reason for commissioning the investigation in the first place.

I don't give two squirts if he testifies or not, but where did you read this (honest Q- I haven't done a lot of digging).

I'm not sure what the point is, though- he's not going to discuss anything in those redactions. This just reeks of desperation.

Did you read the link I posted? It has a very detailed analysis, discusses the methodology they used, even goes into depth as to the rationale used for the redactions. And it's not just some Democratic/lib leaning piece. Here's one of their conclusions:

From what we can gather from surrounding context, there don’t appear to be any egregious, politically motivated redactions.

Here's the link for you one more time:

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/19/18485535/ ... data-chart

BTW, it's refreshing to know that you have enough squirts left that you can afford to lose I a couple. I have to conserve.

[burrrton]

Did you read the link I posted?

No- only looked at the graphic. I did now, though.

Wasn't the point of the investigation supposed to be "collusion"? The only 'section' that sounds applicable to that is "Russian Govt Links to and Contacts With the Trump Campaign", of which only 4% of it was redacted (according to the article).

"Russian Hacking and Dumping Operations" and "Russian 'Active Measures' Social Media Campaign" sounds like stuff we already knew.

I think that article makes it sound even worse that Dems are refusing to read it.

BTW, it's refreshing to know that you have enough squirts left that you can afford to lose I a couple. I have to conserve.

[RiverDog]

Wasn't the point of the investigation supposed to be "collusion"? The only 'section' that sounds applicable to that is "Russian Govt Links to and Contacts With the Trump Campaign", of which only 4% of it was redacted (according to the article).

"Russian Hacking and Dumping Operations" and "Russian 'Active Measures' Social Media Campaign" sounds like stuff we already knew.

I think that article makes it sound even worse that Dems are refusing to read it.

4% is still nearly one word in 20. Keep in mind that it's just a pixel count, so little words like "it", "was", "and", etc that have little context and are not struck out are going to run up the percentage that's unredacted, so that 4% estimate may not capture the impact that key words that could have been redacted might have on the information and/or conclusions that was gathered.

The major point was, indeed, to investigate "collusion." But there are other matters that may have arisen during the course of the investigation, such as obstruction of justice, that the commission was authorized to investigate.

[burrrton]

4% is still nearly one word in 20.

Exactly. For every paragraph redacted in that section, TWENTY of them aren't.

Keep in mind that it's just a pixel count, so little words like "it", "was", "and", etc that have little context and are not struck out are going to run up the percentage that's unredacted, so that 4% estimate may not capture the impact that key words that could have been redacted might have on the information and/or conclusions that was gathered.

Yep, and House Dems with access would know that if, you know, they'd read the fcking thing.

The major point was, indeed, to investigate "collusion."

"Factual Results of the Obstruction Investigation"... 2% redacted.

I'm not really sure why we're going back and forth on this. They're not getting the redacted information and there's a 0% chance Mueller will discuss it (from what I've read anyway).

It's just political posturing to feed the outrage machine.

[RiverDog]

Exactly. For every paragraph redacted in that section, TWENTY of them aren't.

Still not acceptable.

The major point was, indeed, to investigate "collusion."

Agreed. But it was never the intent of the investigation to limit it to just that.

I'm not really sure why we're going back and forth on this. They're not getting the redacted information and there's a 0% chance Mueller will discuss it (from what I've read anyway).

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The Dems are going to take both the issue of not having full access to the report to court and will likely at least attempt to compel Mueller to testify. Whether they will be successful or not I wouldn't want to guess.

It's just political posturing to feed the outrage machine.

Yea, and maybe it's to Trump's political benefit to keep this "outrage" machine in high gear as it keeps his witchhunt mantra alive.

There has to be some sort of compromise. Just saying "trust me" isn't going to fly.

[Aseahawkfan]

I'm with burrton on this one. Yes, I voted for $30 license tabs, and no one voted to end the death penalty. We do not live in a pure democracy where the majority always gets their way. Heck, even the 2016 election resulted in the majority opinion not winning the day. It is completely unreasonable to think that we be able to vote on all the issues that came before the Legislature, and I don't want them consulting a poll or focus group, I want them to lead, which sometimes means taking unpopular stands. I'm perfectly happy with being allowed to vote on things that are truly important, like allowing a state income tax.

I have a female friend, former co-worker from China that was outraged that Susan Collins, a Senator elected from Maine with a population a shade over 1 million, could make a decision in a country with a population of 320 million plus that put Bret Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS for life. We had a lively discussion on the formation of the country and the big state/small state compromise that resulted in the make-up of Congress.

We do not live in a pure democracy. We live in a representative republic. We elect representatives to do our bidding for us. I have no desire to live in a country where every single issue is put to a public vote, nor do I desire to live in a place where it's mob rule.

Why would you be ok with elected representatives pushing their morals on the citizens without asking them? Do we really have to wait until they push through a state income tax for you to do be like "wait a minute"? They have been overstepping their bounds for some time with executive orders and other trash.

It's not about the majority. It's about politicians using the government office to push their personal morals. I have no idea why you think that is acceptable.

[Aseahawkfan]

Riverdog,

What are you even talking about? It was about collusion. The Dems pushed a collusion narrative with the help of the media. Mueller found no collusion. Now they want to pursue an obstruction charge for a crime that didn't occur and you're ok with that? How is that not abuse of power?

As far as I'm concerned, Barr needs to keep on doing what he's doing. If the pansy Dems and Trump haters want endless investigations until they get Trump like you seem to want now, then Trump needs to play his games. Because this is one of the worst abuses of Congressional power and partisan attack I've ever seen. I hope it backfires on them badly.

I still have no idea why the method for acquiring the information to start this investigation isn't being looked into. I'd like to see this turned on some of the Dems. They deserve some pain.

[RiverDog]

Riverdog,

What are you even talking about? It was about collusion. The Dems pushed a collusion narrative with the help of the media. Mueller found no collusion. Now they want to pursue an obstruction charge for a crime that didn't occur and you're ok with that?

Yes. If Trump or anyone else tried to hinder the investigation, say by intimidating or threatening potential witnesses, then that's a crime. It doesn't require that the investigation make a discovery of collusion in order for an obstruction of justice crime to have been committed.

[burrrton]

Still not acceptable.

*sigh* Ok, believe what you want, of course, but this is in line with literally every other report like this in history. Tell yourself it's a big conspiracy this time if you need to, I guess.

Yea, and maybe it's to Trump's political benefit to keep this "outrage" machine in high gear as it keeps his witchhunt mantra alive.

Yup. Just like the birther bullsh*t was with Obama, this only makes the other side look like dipsh*ts, and I'm sure Trump is laughing his ass off about it (just like I think Obama did).

Just saying "trust me" isn't going to fly.

There's no "trust me" going on- he has no obligation to them. He's (as of now) saying "you're not getting anything else- deal".

They can subpoena him, but he can get up on the stand and make a beat-off motion with his hand if he wants. I have no idea what they think is going to come of this unless they think Mueller is going to decide to humor them.

[idhawkman]

7.25% of the report is redacted. That's over one word in 20, more than "a few". Additionally, most of the redactions in the report were on Russian hacking and election interference, the entire reason for commissioning the investigation in the first place.

Here's a graphic that shows the redactions. There are entire pages that are blacked out:

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/19/18485535/ ... data-chart

I'm not sure why anyone would object to Mueller testifying before Congress unless they're afraid of what he might say.

The full (UNREDACTED) report is available in the Senate SCIF. No Dems have gone to see it. That says everything you need to know right there. Any Senator or Congressman can go read the full thing. They just can't copy it or take it out of the SCIF.

[idhawkman]

I don't give two squirts if he testifies or not, but where did you read this (honest Q- I haven't done a lot of digging).

I'm not sure what the point is, though- he's not going to discuss anything in those redactions.

Bad news for Dems, Mueller won't be coming to the Senate or House unless he reponds to Lindsey Graham's letter that he does not agree with what Barr said on the hill yesterday.

Remember, after he submitted his report, Mueller's job as a govt. employee was over. The only way he can testify to what is in the report or any other questions is if Barr allows him to. He's a private citizen now. Barr says this is now OVER! Get over it, move on dems.

I would also like to point out that Barr asked Mueller to review his 4 page report before he sent it out and Mueller refused. As I said 2 weeks ago, this is over and done but the dems just don't know it yet. McGann is over and done, too. Its over. The report is there for anyone to go read unredacted. Everything else is just smoke and mirrors by the dems.

[idhawkman]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The Dems are going to take both the issue of not having full access to the report to court and will likely at least attempt to compel Mueller to testify. Whether they will be successful or not I wouldn't want to guess.

They can go to court but they won't get the courts to rule in their favor. The only way 6E material can be opened up by the courts is "ONLY IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS". They had to argue to the courts that Watergate was a judicial proceeding because it was in an impeachment setting. The dems don't want to impeach as they'll lose their backsides. This is why they want the appearance of an impeachment proceeding by having their attorney's "CROSS EXAMINE" AG Barr. Yes, Nadler actually said "Cross Examine him". That should end any speculation as to what that whole thing was about.

It's just political posturing to feed the outrage machine.

Yea, and maybe it's to Trump's political benefit to keep this "outrage" machine in high gear as it keeps his witchhunt mantra alive.

There has to be some sort of compromise. Just saying "trust me" isn't going to fly.[/quote]
Absolutely he wants it to continue because he is very happy to point out that the Dems did absolutely nothing in the house in the form of meaningful legislation during their tenure. He's going to beat that drum like a native American on a war path.

Popcorn, get your popcorn here.

[idhawkman]

Why would you be ok with elected representatives pushing their morals on the citizens without asking them? Do we really have to wait until they push through a state income tax for you to do be like "wait a minute"? They have been overstepping their bounds for some time with executive orders and other trash.

It's not about the majority. It's about politicians using the government office to push their personal morals. I have no idea why you think that is acceptable.

You do realize that the new secret is that they don't need to raise state income tax because they just impose a "fee" instead, right? Fees for almost anything and everything you do in your life.

[idhawkman]

I still have no idea why the method for acquiring the information to start this investigation isn't being looked into. I'd like to see this turned on some of the Dems. They deserve some pain.

Actually it is. There are 9 separate investigations that Barr mentioned in the Senate testimony which is why the dems are going apesh@t at this point. Keep watching because it is starting and keep an eye out for the news coming out of Ukraine. Its about to rain down on the dems and all the way into the white house.

[I-5]

I thought people on this forum said that the full interacted report was available to Congress. Is it? From today:

“Barr offered access to a less-redacted version of the report to just 12 members of Congress — six Democrats and six Republicans. But as of Tuesday afternoon, only Rep. Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, opted to view it. A third, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he planned to review the report later Tuesday.”

[Aseahawkfan]

Yes. If Trump or anyone else tried to hinder the investigation, say by intimidating or threatening potential witnesses, then that's a crime. It doesn't require that the investigation make a discovery of collusion in order for an obstruction of justice crime to have been committed.

Oh BS. This was a fabricated investigation Trump asked people to get control of so it wouldn't plague his presidency. He didn't threaten or intimidate anyone. Just more BS from the Dems and gameplaying. The only reason you're not reading about their lies and trash is because they're not getting endlessly investigated. Otherwise, we'd have equal abuses of a similar kind from them snakes.

This is just more useless investigation down a path to nowhere for the Dems and people like you who want to waste time on this trash. Trump did not obstruct. All the witnesses are there investigated by Mueller and the ones with crimes indited. This is a path to nowhere, just like the collusion.

Unbelievable that you're wanting them waste more time on this horsecrap. I guess it pays for the Dems to do so since they have nothing to sell the people as far as legislation goes. I have no idea why you've decided to buy into time wasting trash.

[Aseahawkfan]

Actually it is. There are 9 separate investigations that Barr mentioned in the Senate testimony which is why the dems are going apesh@t at this point. Keep watching because it is starting and keep an eye out for the news coming out of Ukraine. Its about to rain down on the dems and all the way into the white house.

I hope they burn each other down. They just go back and forth showing how corrupt American politics is on all sides. It's embarrassing as an American to watch this. Just an embarrassment no one seems willing to stop to actually govern.

If the Dems are pushing this hard for impeachment, they must really consider their chances of beating Trump in 2020 as low. If they were confident they could beat Trump in 2020, they would focus less on pointless, go nowhere investigations they don't have to the votes to make happen and start trying to sway the people based on issues.

I might have to deal with four more years of The Narcissist because of how weak, divided, and disorganized the Dems are as well as no viable Republican challenger. Man, this is going to suck.

[RiverDog]

Yes. If Trump or anyone else tried to hinder the investigation, say by intimidating or threatening potential witnesses, then that's a crime. It doesn't require that the investigation make a discovery of collusion in order for an obstruction of justice crime to have been committed.

Oh BS. This was a fabricated investigation Trump asked people to get control of so it wouldn't plague his presidency. He didn't threaten or intimidate anyone. Just more BS from the Dems and gameplaying.

I didn't say that he did. You asked me a question if I was OK with pursuing an obstruction of justice charge related to a crime that didn't occur and I said yes and gave some examples of what might constitute O of J. It doesn't require a positive finding in the investigation for an obstruction of justice crime to have occurred. You seemed to be suggesting that if there was no collusion that it would render any obstruction of justice irrelevant.

Here's some of the evidence from the Mueller report that Trump supposedly did:

Mueller laid out at least a half-dozen crimes of obstruction committed by Trump -- from asking former Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland to write an untruthful letter about the reason for Flynn's chat with Kislyak, to asking Corey Lewandowski and then-former White House Counsel Don McGahn to fire Mueller and McGahn to lie about it, to firing Comey to impede the FBI's investigations, to dangling a pardon in front of Michael Cohen to stay silent, to ordering his aides to hide and delete records.

I don't know how much, if any, of that stuff is true, but it's evidence taken directly from Mueller's report and not something fabricated by the Dems.

This is just more useless investigation down a path to nowhere for the Dems and people like you who want to waste time on this trash. Trump did not obstruct. All the witnesses are there investigated by Mueller and the ones with crimes indited. This is a path to nowhere, just like the collusion.

And that's fine by me. I'd rather have Congress distracted by this garbage than I would them working on something that could really damage our country, like Medicare for All or the Green New Deal. Mueller's already recovered enough unpaid tax revenue to pay for his investigation so it didn't cost us a dime.

[Hawktawk]

America is rapidly becoming a banana republic in terms of the rule of law. Bob Mueller reached out to Bob Barr 4 separate times within a couple of days of the release of the report to complain about Barr's characterizations of it and the withholding of the summaries written by Mueller team for the express purpose of adding context to the report.

Barr hid this from the congress, the press and the american people doubling down the proof that his initial 4 page whitewash was to set a political narrative favorable to dear leader.He perjured himself in front of the congress a few weeks ago when he said he "didn't know" if Mueller agreed with his findings.

Now after this great "exoneration" they wont let McGann testify, Barr wont show up to face a lawyers questions instead of politicians when Little Christine Blasi Ford had the guts to. They are trying to block Mueller from testifying.

Trump whines its "political". Well goddamn right there is a political element but last Nov the american people handed the Repubs their biggest congressional beating since Watergate because they wanted checks and balances and so that is tough s***. The congress has a right to the documents, the people, the redacted grand jury stuff that many other intelligence committees in previous scandals such as Watergate, Iran Contra, Whitewater etc got to see.They are the constitutionally appointed co equal branch with the power of the purse, oversight of the executive branch and lawmaking. We the people have the right to the truth. It stuns me the intelligent people here and elsewhere in our nation just dont seem to think its a big deal.

Its chilling the utter level of corruption that is going on in this administration and now with the walrus Barr as the gatekeeper its far worse. And this isn't covering up a consensual blowjob from an intern. This is a campaign and administration CLEARLY PROVABLY obstructing an investigation into CLEAR interference by our greatest geopolitical foe with the clear intention of electing Trump. The Campaign clearly was aware of the help and welcomed it. Campaign polling data from key battleground states was shared on SEVERAL occasions by then campaign chair Manafort with Constantine Kelimnic a known Russian operative with ties to the Kremlin. Barr seemed unaware of this when being questioned the other day or at least acted unaware.

So though the report did not establish a criminal conspiracy it certainly established a pattern of corrupt unethical unprecedented cooperation .Frankly with whats known about the Russian interference, all the assistance and the efforts by Trump to lift sanctions, shape the party platform to benefit Ukraine and Russia Im not sure what the hell the standard for collusion is?

Obstruction is as clear as the nose on trumps face and Mueller made clear he was restrained from filing criminal charges primarily due to justice dept guidelines not to indict a sitting president and little else. Any legal mind not part of the trumptard zombie army agrees any other person in america not the president would be in jail for a fraction of what happened.

Bob Barr isn't schooling anyone on anything but how make himself look like an idiot lying for Trump.Its a sad spectacle.

[burrrton]

The full (UNREDACTED) report is available in the Senate SCIF.

You may know something I don't, but I think the SCIF copy still has those few redactions.

[RiverDog]

The full (UNREDACTED) report is available in the Senate SCIF.

You may know something I don't, but I think the SCIF copy still has those few redactions.

You think correctly. You ought to know by now that Idahawk rarely posts any links or quotes to back up his claims.

The fact is that Barr offered a few select members of Congress, and not just anyone, a look at a less redacted copy of the report, not the full, unredacted version:

Barr offered access to a less-redacted version of the report to just 12 members of Congress-.six Democrats and six Republicans. But as of Tuesday afternoon, only Rep. Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, opted to view it.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/ ... ed-1295105

It kinda reminds me of Nixon offering summaries of the Watergate tapes rather than the tapes themselves.

[burrrton]

It kinda reminds me of Nixon offering summaries of the Watergate tapes rather than the tapes themselves.

Yeah, it's a lot like that, except that it's not at all like that because *nobody*, not even Congress, ever gets to see Grand Jury stuff on these reports.

This faux outrage is nothing but political posturing. Quit buying into it.

[RiverDog]

Yeah, it's a lot like that, except that it's not at all like that because *nobody*, not even Congress, ever gets to see Grand Jury stuff on these reports.

This faux outrage is nothing but political posturing. Quit buying into it.

It is like Nixon and his offering summations of the tapes because both were/are making a limited offer to hear/view evidence and expecting the critics to just go away.

I'm not "buying" into anything. I'm not like Hawktalk and accusing Trump of every crime under the sun and then some. All I am saying is that someone besides Barr should be able to see everything the special counsel has collected. Even bringing in Mueller to testify would shut me up.

[burrrton]

All I am saying is that someone besides Barr should be able to see everything the special counsel has collected.

With Grand Jury info in there, that would be unprecedented. Congress isn't privy to that information.

Even bringing in Mueller to testify would shut me up.

So everyone can b*tch and moan that he didn't answer their questions satisfactorily? It would be absolutely *zero* different than how they're taking the completion of the report. It's plainly obvious nothing will ever be good enough.

Again, he may humor them and testify, but I wouldn't get your hopes up that he's suddenly going to have a change of heart about classified information.

[RiverDog]

All I am saying is that someone besides Barr should be able to see everything the special counsel has collected.

With Grand Jury info in there, that would be unprecedented. Congress isn't privy to that information.

I'm not necessarily saying 'all' of Congress has to view it. I see no reason why they can't make an offer similar to the one that Barr made on the less redacted version where they invited 5 Dems and 5 R's. They were allowed to come in and read it but couldn't make any copies or take any pictures. Making that sort of arrangement isn't going to corrupt grand jury evidence.

Even bringing in Mueller to testify would shut me up.

So everyone can b*tch and moan that he didn't answer their questions satisfactorily? It would be absolutely *zero* different than how they're taking the completion of the report. It's plainly obvious nothing will ever be good enough.

Again, he may humor them and testify, but I wouldn't get your hopes up that he's suddenly going to have a change of heart about classified information.

I didn't say it would shut everyone up, just me. Of course, the Dems would continue to pick away at Trump, but they're going to do that no matter what they do with the Mueller Report. It's not a very good excuse to not let him testify.

[burrrton]

I see no reason why they can't make an offer similar to the one that Barr made on the less redacted version where they invited 5 Dems and 5 R's.

The "reason" would be the same one that applies to all classified information. You don't just divulge CI to people who don't need it and have no right to it just because they don't trust a Special Investigator to have done his job.